WSJ
“Look, Rush Limbaugh and others wanted to walk away”
“Look, Rush Limbaugh and others wanted to walk away. Rush Limbaugh and others saw a million people that worked at these factories, that worked at these parts suppliers, that had — that supported communities, and thought we should all just walk away. The president didn’t think that walking away from a million jobs in these communities made a lot of economic sense,” Gibbs said.
He was just getting up to speed.
“We’ve got auto companies that for the first time since 2004 all showed an operating profit in the first quarter of this year. It’s adding jobs. And the money that this administration invested — about $60 billion — we believe we’re on the path to recouping all of that. That’s a significant story.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
If I decide to buy a new American car, I’ll head to the Ford lot. But I’m just as happy with Japanese cars built at non-union plants right here in the U.S.
GM or Chrysler? NEVER.
VidOmnia on July 29, 2010 at 11:13 PM
Is this guy for real?
Sharke on July 29, 2010 at 11:13 PM
So, I decided to illegally close hundreds of dealerships of GOP donors.
faraway on July 29, 2010 at 11:13 PM
No, GM and Ford showed an operating profit, Chrysler did NOT.
Ford showed a profit because nobody is buying GM and GM only showed an operating profit because, for the first time, they were allowed to shut down labor costs for almost two months while the GM agreement allowed them to spin off their hefty pension/insurance plans to the unions WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS.
We will never, EVER recoup the 60 billion spent on GM just as we will never EVER recoup the moneys you’ve spent on unemployment which you claim are being used to buy new cars.
But then this is how the Chicago two step works…
Skywise on July 29, 2010 at 11:14 PM
We have laws. Why do these fools never want to obey them. They always want to come up with some new and improved comprehensive crap. And I am sure Ford appreciates the plug since they didn’t take our money.
Cindy Munford on July 29, 2010 at 11:15 PM
That’s just not true. Those million jobs would not have disappeared. Maybe some of them would, but not all. They would have filed bankruptcy and reorganized in a system that’s already in place. Just like a lot of airlines did in the Bush years. Then the gov’t wouldn’t be owning and controlling private industry, nor forcing the giveaway of private capital to an uninvested third party union.
Gibbs is a party man, and good for him. But he’s also full of sh!t.
Tennman on July 29, 2010 at 11:15 PM
Priceless.
VidOmnia on July 29, 2010 at 11:16 PM
Face palm.
Monica on July 29, 2010 at 11:17 PM
Wow. He’s really in their heads.
SouthernGent on July 29, 2010 at 11:17 PM
Jinx!
Monica on July 29, 2010 at 11:17 PM
Actually what Limbaugh and others were saying was that GM should just declare bankruptcy, which they did anyway.
ddrintn on July 29, 2010 at 11:18 PM
The bailout was of the UAW.
ddrintn on July 29, 2010 at 11:20 PM
The official spokesturtle keeps omitting a key fact, Chapter 11 doesn’t mean the business gets shut down, it just means the union bloodsuckers would have had to settle for a sustainable pension and health plan, like the rest of us schlubs.
But no, the first White House spokesperson with Down’s Syndrome and his communistic organizer in chief had to steal the company to give it to the unions.
LA Conservative on July 29, 2010 at 11:22 PM
CHEVY VOLT
Skandia Recluse on July 29, 2010 at 11:27 PM
Wait, it got better:
Nobody ever claimed Bobby is the sharpest knife in Obama’s drawer.
KittyLowrey on July 29, 2010 at 11:28 PM
From George Will’s speech at CPAC this year. Truer words have not been spoken.
Cindy Munford on July 29, 2010 at 11:29 PM
Gibbs doesn’t even know what he himself thinks…how is he privy to Limbaugh’s thoughts?
fossten on July 29, 2010 at 11:29 PM
I’ve never read that Alinsky book, but wasn’t one of his rules something about personalizing the target?
David Shane on July 29, 2010 at 11:30 PM
And apparently Obama and Bobby are trying to claim credit.
Not so fast, sonny.
KittyLowrey on July 29, 2010 at 11:31 PM
So, Rush wanted government to walk away from Ford and look how that turned out?
Go, Ford!
Rush and many of us knew you could do it. On your own.
KittyLowrey on July 29, 2010 at 11:32 PM
Hey, leave Volt alone. He’s all out of gas, and the charge is gone.
faraway on July 29, 2010 at 11:33 PM
Oh Mr Gibbs, you’re such a piker. Rush will have you for lunch tomorrow, and everyday after that. Again.
Remember the song Mr Gibbs: You don’t pull on Supermans cape.
JoeAvg on July 29, 2010 at 11:35 PM
Whoa there. You think Obama is doing this on purpose? hmmm… Maybe you are on to something. Mixing up Ford with GM to mislead the public. They wouldn’t do that would they?
faraway on July 29, 2010 at 11:36 PM
I’m torn. I absolutely do think that they would do it but I am not sure their are smart enough to know one car, let alone a car maker, from another.
Cindy Munford on July 29, 2010 at 11:39 PM
I liked this part to.
Cindy Munford on July 29, 2010 at 11:45 PM
If nobody is buying GM, why did the Chevy Camaro outsell the Ford Mustang since it has been on the market?
I’m seeing quite a few new Buick Enclaves around here lately,
along with Silverados and Sierras, Tahoes and Escalades.
The Cadillac CTS is quite popular as well.
Then there is the King of the Hill, the ZR-1 Corvette.
Brian1972 on July 29, 2010 at 11:48 PM
Brian, that’s old news
Ford Mustang sales top Chevrolet Camaro in May
faraway on July 29, 2010 at 11:51 PM
2011 Mustang is going to be awesome. I expect Camero to get beefed up in response.
Cindy Munford on July 29, 2010 at 11:51 PM
Yeah, I see a hell of a lot of people driving those.
/eyeroll
CurtZHP on July 30, 2010 at 12:06 AM
It’s amazing how you can squeak out a small profit for a quarter with free taxpayer supplied credit, special deal and not having to fund your 12.5 billion dollar pension liability.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/07/business/07cars.html
elfman on July 30, 2010 at 6:28 AM
Weird how that works./ These guys are geniuses,/
CWforFreedom on July 30, 2010 at 6:38 AM
Read all the way to the bottom for the best bit: Gibbs mouthing off that he doesn’t know what Rush drives, but he bets it’s not an F-150.
Which is a Ford. Duh.
I think Rush should run out and buy one…
S. Weasel on July 30, 2010 at 6:41 AM
Without looking it up, I’ll suggest the new ones don’t sit in dealer inventory forever.
Full disclosure: I drive a Corvette, an ’02 to be exact. I’ve been contemplating getting a new one, but I’m an old fuddy duddy and don’t care for the new body aesthetic. Be that as it may, I don’t think the GM buyout is as likely to affect product quality like it will other models, seeing how the the Corvette plants are not in Michigan.
And while we’re on the subject, I used to have a 95 Camaro. When it came time to buy a new car, I wanted to get one like it, but the folks in Michigan had stopped making Camaros and Firebirds, and I happened to like the body styles on those. Which is why a bought a Corvette. I am SO not interested in the new Camaro aesthetic. But, as I’ve said, that’s just me being old that way.
apostic on July 30, 2010 at 6:45 AM
I’ll drive it for him.
jimmy2shoes on July 30, 2010 at 7:03 AM
I can’t say what nobody is doing, but I know GM products aren’t on my radar and it’s solely because of the lawless way their situation was handled.
If I didn’t keep up with the news and didn’t know how bankruptcy laws are supposed to work but I knew who was winning American Idol right now then I might buy a GM. Heck, according to their massive advertising campaign about “letting the best car win” (hint- it already did, but the loser wasn’t allowed to lose) they’ve got some great financing and even better rebates that we’ve all paid for. Not to mention some tax credits, too. Like the home-buyers’ credit, all those subsidies are enticing.
As it is, I don’t really know what would have to change to get me in one of their dealerships.
rogerb on July 30, 2010 at 7:09 AM
Gibbsy pretty much proves Rush’s point with his F150 comment.
FWIW I drive a 2003 Silverado and it’s a great truck. I will not purchase a Chevy again only because of the gov’t ownership.
roux on July 30, 2010 at 7:09 AM
Oh, and since it’s getting lost with the F150 bit, Mr. Limbaugh is still a private citizen being publicly attacked by an administration whose duty is to represent him.
That’s disgusting and a bit scary.
rogerb on July 30, 2010 at 7:19 AM
But, but, but, GM paid their loan back! I read that. /sarc
Dingbat63 on July 30, 2010 at 7:20 AM
Maybe Gibbs should read this.
rob verdi on July 30, 2010 at 7:21 AM
LOL on the “GM operating profit”.
I can have an operating profit too if I have access to a printing press to cover my losses.
angryed on July 30, 2010 at 7:21 AM
I’m surprised Ford hasn’t made more of the fact they didn’t take Obama money.
Obama sycophants don’t drive Fords – they drive Priuses and Civics – so they wouldn’t lose any customers. But a lot of people don’t realize that Ford didn’t get bailed out. And I think if they did find out it would greatly increase their perception of the company.
angryed on July 30, 2010 at 7:24 AM
I imagine the don’t want to burn any bridges.
Cindy Munford on July 30, 2010 at 7:29 AM
Rush should be thanking Gibbsey for this; it will be ratings and comedy Gold for weeks!
Time to get the musical parody boys to work on a new campaign!
mad scientist on July 30, 2010 at 7:51 AM
YES! Are we so used to the way this administration attacks private citizens that this becomes a secondary point?
hoosiermama on July 30, 2010 at 7:52 AM
No, Gibbsey, “walking away” did not mean those people would lose their jobs. It meant that management and the union would have to make hard choices foisted on them by a bankruptcy court. Your boss stepped in to protect the union from having to make those choices. He then pummeled the management.
Kafir on July 30, 2010 at 7:59 AM
Most liberals wouldn’t be caught dead in an American-label car; Gibbs starting a flame war with Rush to remind conservatives not to buy Chevy or Chrysler can’t be good for either company.
The first card-check targets will probably be the foreign-nameplate auto manufacturers operating in the US such as Honda, Nissan, Toyota, and Hyundai.
I drive a Nissan (made here), I liked my Silverado (previous)but I won’t buy another as long as there is government or union ownership.
mad scientist on July 30, 2010 at 8:01 AM
Gibbs forgot to coordinate his message with the NY Times.
In today’s NY Times:
G.M.’s Electric Lemon
“For starters, G.M.’s vision turned into a car that costs $41,000 before relevant tax breaks … but after billions of dollars of government loans and grants for the Volt’s development and production. And instead of the sleek coupe of 2007, it looks suspiciously similar to a Toyota Prius. It also requires premium gasoline, seats only four people (the battery runs down the center of the car, preventing a rear bench) and has less head and leg room than the $17,000 Chevrolet Cruze, which is more or less the non-electric version of the Volt.
In short, the Volt appears to be exactly the kind of green-at-all-costs car that some opponents of the bailout feared the government might order G.M. to build.
Quantifying just how much taxpayer money will have been wasted on the hastily developed Volt is no easy feat.”
Don`t miss the graphic with the story.
albill on July 30, 2010 at 8:06 AM
The whole “we had to save them meme” is absolute horsesh^t. A chapter 11 would have worked perfectly, new investors would have bought up assets, they would be building cars and trucks all along…but the unions would have been busted.
It was all about the Dems (admin) protecting the Unions. Period.
Tim Zank on July 30, 2010 at 8:08 AM
I drove a Chevy Suburban from 1988 til Sept. of last year. I got a new car in April; not a Suburban. Specifically because I did not want to buy from Obama Moters. Its a shame really, but given the choice I will not support the subversion of the rule of law by these crooks.
txmomof6 on July 30, 2010 at 8:20 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »